 |
| |
|
|
Asher
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:22
|
|
Submitted without comment. 
http://www.canada.com/national/stor...6-952B2BA1C4E7}
quote:
72% of Albertans oppose Kyoto
Poll results
Charlie Gillis
National Post
Saturday, October 05, 2002
EDMONTON - The Alberta government received some long-awaited ammunition yesterday for its war against Kyoto, as a public opinion poll suggested 72% of Albertans think Canada should withdraw from the climate-change accord.
Some 70% believe the deal will put Canada at an economic disadvantage, according to the government-commissioned poll, while 25% of respondents said Canada would not suffer a disadvantage.
Nineteen percent said Canada should go ahead and ratify the accord.
The results were drawn from a survey by Environics West, a Calgary firm that surveyed 1,200 Albertans between Sept. 17 and Oct. 2. It is considered accurate to within 2.8 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
The finding suggests an about-face in Albertans' opinions on Kyoto and salves a sore point for the Progressive Conservative government. For months, the province's anti-Kyoto battle had been undercut by polls suggesting Albertans actually support the accord to reduce greenhouse gas emissions -- even if they did not know what it said.
One survey released by the province last May suggested fully 72% favour Kyoto, while national polls pegged support well above 50%.
Critics immediately attacked the new poll as skewed against Kyoto, noting that the key question -- whether Canada should ratify the accord -- was preceded by references to exemptions granted to developing countries.
The preambles also referred to the U.S. decision to withdraw from the protocol.
"You can get very different answers from polling depending on the way questions are asked," said Matthew Bramley, director of climate change for the pro-Kyoto Pembina Institute. "I do think the poll is quite unfair in the way it's composed."
Still, Mr. Bramley said the findings suggest the province's $2-million advertising campaign against Kyoto is working -- a fact he admits worries him.
He described the government's message, which hit the airwaves and newspapers in the province on Sept. 18, as "misleading." Among other things, the province's ads warn that Kyoto could cost Canada 450,000 jobs, drive up taxes and inflate fuel prices.
He warned Albertans against the government's call for a made-in-Canada solution, saying previous attempts to cut greenhouse-gas emissions in Canada have failed.
"Albertans need to know that an unilateral Canadian alternative to Kyoto is very unlikely to reduce our emissions," he said.
Janet Brown, a research consultant with Environics West, agreed that Albertans appear to be getting behind the government, but defended the organization of the poll.
While the questions do mention downsides to Kyoto, respondents were also asked whether they thought emerging technologies would offset economic disadvantage wrought by the accord, she noted.
"We did present two arguments, a strong argument for and a strong argument against," Ms. Brown said, "and we tried to balance the questions ... the length of the descriptions [of pros and cons] might have been slightly different, but we did rotate the order of them in asking."
The poll also suggests Albertans are much more familiar with Kyoto than they were several months ago, Ms. Brown said.
Fully 91% of respondents said they had heard of it, and 55% of those individuals claimed to be very familiar or somewhat familiar with its terms. |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
As always...
ppl putting their immediate personnal (and even hypothetical) benefits before a common long term goal or cause....
Its sad but not surprising
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
I think Australia is going to opt out of Kyoto as well. Maybe we are all the new axis of evil??
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:22
|
|
Quick question: Is it true or not that developing nations do not have to abide by Kyoto?
The only real complaint people have here is that it tells people something they probably didn't know.
All this shows is that, given a bigger picture of the story than Jeany let's on to everyone, most people oppose it than support it.
It doesn't invalidate a damn thing, since the preceding question was a true fact pertaining to Kyoto also. The people criticizing it are doing so because they don't want people to know the "bad" things about Kyoto, and then I guess they don't want it to be asked so less people know about it.
Poor form. People already know it's "going to reduce emissions" since Jeany told everyone that many times, many people do not know developing countries don't need to sign it. So if they know both, they'll be more informed -- which is what will happen anyway after Kyoto is signed.
It's lefties squirming in their seats grasping at straws, is all. 
Not to mention
quote:
While the questions do mention downsides to Kyoto, respondents were also asked whether they thought emerging technologies would offset economic disadvantage wrought by the accord, she noted. |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Loif
|
|
Nah. We'll just take the western provinces with us and separate. Form our own little country. We could do it. It would take awhile but I think we could support ourselves. Alberta, BC and Saskatchewan, maybe even Manitoba if they could tear themselves away from the East.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Lawrence of Arabia
|
 |
of the Gulag Archipelago
Apr 2001
time: 06:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Fez
Deep economic depression or economic advancement? I say economic advancement. To advance means to get better technology. Kyoto does crap to bring a clean environment.  |
Kyoto Treatt, Article 2
vi) Encouragement of appropriate reforms in relevant sectors aimed at promoting policies and measures which limit or reduce emissions of greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol;
(vii) Measures to limit and/or reduce emissions of greenhouse
gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol in the transport sector;
3. The Parties included in Annex I shall strive to implement policies and measures under this Article in such a way as to minimize adverse effects, including the adverse effects of climate change, effects on international trade, and social, environmental and economic impacts on other Parties, especially developing country Parties and in particular those identified in Article 4, paragraphs 8 and 9, of the Convention, taking into account Article 3 of the Convention. The Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to this Protocol may take further action, as appropriate, to promote the implementation of the provisions of this paragraph.
Article 3
1. The Parties included in Annex I shall, individually or jointly, ensure that their aggregate anthropogenic carbon dioxide equivalent emissions of the greenhouse gases listed in Annex A do not exceed their assigned amounts, calculated pursuant to their quantified emission limitation and reduction commitments inscribed in Annex B and in accordance with the provisions of this Article, with a view to reducing their overall emissions of such gases by at least 5 per cent below 1990 levels in the commitment period 2008 to 2012.
2. Each Party included in Annex I shall, by 2005, have made demonstrable progress in achieving its commitments under this Protocol.
3. The net changes in greenhouse gas emissions by sources and removals by sinks resulting from direct human-induced land-use change and forestry activities, limited to afforestation, reforestation and deforestation since 1990, measured as verifiable changes in carbon stocks in each commitment period, shall be used to meet the commitments under this Article of each Party included in Annex I. The greenhouse gas emissions by sources and removals by sinks associated with those activities shall be reported in a transparent and verifiable manner and reviewed in accordance with Articles 7 and 8.
Kyoto Treat
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22.
Apolyton Time is 00:22. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-10-2002 00:56
?
|